Ed BottI would really like to quote-tweet this, adding my 2 cents and amplifying Taylor's words.
But I can't. And that's unfortunate.
Dave Kearns@edbott
You just did ...
You just did ...
@dak3 Not really. No one can interact with the original post, or reply to the author, or even see if it's been edited!
@dak3 Friction on top of friction.
Hughster@edbott @dak3 The friction is deliberate, and it makes sense to me, given how easily the feature was misused in anger to put "enemies" on blast. I don't know if you've seen it but there's a good early discussion here:
https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/99662106175542726
https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/99662106175542726
saywhat@saywhat @edbott @dak3 Not exactly. If you click the link, can you immediately reply? No—you're taken to a web page of another server where you can only read (without extra steps to copy and paste the URL into your own app). The aim is introducing enough friction to make it less likely people will bother, not making it impossible (because you can't).
And now you can
https://kolektiva.social/@Gargron@mastodon.social/99662106184791811
There is no friction to this unless your mind has been so warped by the world being geared toward instant gratification that you can't handle taking seconds of time to do something (if you are linking to direct people to harass and dogpile they are more likely than not going to be on your server and you will tailor the link for this)
The post you decided to link to doesn't even support your argument of why the guy isn't deciding to implement it. It actually shows he thinks what you don't like is a good thing
"Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way."
Eugen Rochko (@[email protected])
I've made a deliberate choice against a quoting feature because it inevitably adds toxicity to people's behaviours. You are tempted to quote when you should be replying, and so you speak at your audience instead of with the person you are talking to. It becomes performative. Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way. No quote toots. Thank's
@saywhat How did you post that link? The default Mastodon web interface and apps only allow you to copy links to posts on the other user's instance, e.g.:
https://kolektiva.social/@saywhat/109597769926578435
So in order to convert the link to an internal link on your own instance where you can reply to the post, you have to manually edit it or copy+paste it into your search box and copy the new link, i.e.:
https://mastodon.social/@saywhat@kolektiva.social/109597769967761154
That's enough friction to deter instant reactions, at least, and I think that's the point.
saywhat (@[email protected])
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] And now you can https://kolektiva.social/@[email protected]/99662106184791811 There is no friction to this unless your mind has been so warped by the world being geared toward instant gratification that you can't handle taking seconds of time to do something (if you are linking to direct people to harass and dogpile they are more likely than not going to be on your server and you will tailor the link for this) The post you decided to link to doesn't even support your argument of why the guy isn't deciding to implement it. It actually shows he thinks what you don't like is a good thing "Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way."
Someone could write a script to do this in under 5 mins. This whole argument is akin to security by obscurity and doesn't hold water in stopping either the real reason by the main dev or the reasons put on to the dev by others. The only people it can stop are people who are so broken by the instant gratification pushed by the net that they can't handle taking less than a minute of their time without getting a dopamine hit (which weirdly seems to be the core user base of mastodon)
@saywhat Someone could write a script to do almost anything in under 5 mins. The point is that the vast majority of users won't.
People install extensions and userscripts daily in fact is whole sites dedicated to providing them
@saywhat What percentage of total Mastodon users use them?
How am I supposed to know that? I can say that on the chrome store 10,000,000+ users have installed ublock and as we are supposedly on a tech oriented site with less than 10 million users we can only hope that 100% of the people who are here use some form of content blocker, either self written or written by someone else.
Mastodon even removes the need to edit links as it allows you to just search the link on your instance and lets you reply as normal (again not a hurdle and adds zero friction unless your mind is broken from years of instant gratification)
"How am I supposed to know that?"
Then how do you know that anything more than a small minority of Mastodon users will use them to get around these specific limitations?
"I can say that on the chrome store 10,000,000+ users have installed ublock and as we are supposedly on a tech oriented site with less than 10 million users we can only hope that 100% of the people who are here use some form of content blocker"
That is a hell of a leap of logic.
You want to know how many people here install extensions and scripts. We are on a apparently tech oriented service (starting to doubt this) it is as good an indicator as anything.
@saywhat There is no correlation between the number of Mastodon users who use userscripts to modify website behaviour and the number of global users of a Chrome plugin. There is simply no reliable basis from which to extrapolate the former from the latter.